Jump to content
Server time: 2017-08-21, 06:33

Sign in to follow this  
Sam Fields

Subjective < Objective?

Recommended Posts

Sam Fields    153

This has been a theme in recent complaints against report outcomes. 

Subjective data is generally qualitative (e.g non-numerical/rich) data, meaning that interpreting it objectively in its raw form is a flawed concept. You simply can't. Reports and the situations within them yield mounds of qualitative data for the staff to shift through- and therefore mistakes/ inconsistencies are always going to arise. But complaining about this method and not suggesting another one is a problem in itself.

If we really wanted to push for all reports to become systematically and scientifically looked at: we would have to group the behaviours/actions in a report into labelled and stated categories (for every rule). For example: BadRP could have the category of: "Perpetrator uses OOC language that is unrelated to the apocalyptic situation". This would be an insane work load, and has its flaws; itself.

It would leave no room for interpretation. Yes, allowing transferring reports into being objectively analysed is meant to eliminate interpretation... but some situations will be so diverse and complex that the categorised system will fail (with staff having to subjectively decided whether a behaviour fits into a negative category).

I'd like to hear your guys' thoughts on the possibility of objectivity being used in reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusty    1052

I agree. If we wanted to go the cold, scientific approach, we'd only allow reports that have video evidence, which could be a good thing. However, it'd make the job even more difficult as it's difficult for a human - especially a volunteer - to be as cold and objective as possible. 

Some reports can be handled in a cold and scientific way, but the reports that involve potential bad RP are impossible to be completely objective with. Each situation is different, and needs to be treated differently. Lately there's been a lot of hate for the case by case system for some reason. If we didn't use the case by case system, then, for example, every post that was a little bit aggressive or used potentially insulting word choice would result in warning points, even if the post broke no forum rules. I'm sure everybody would absolutely hate that type of forum moderation. 

While case by case basis can leave room for inconsistency, it is the best way to go. Consistency can be especially difficult to reach when there are many different view points and opinions within the staff team. When a reported post comes up, around 3-10 max staff members discuss the post and whether or not it deserves points. Because of this, there can be a lot of inconsistency. This is how reports are handled as well. When it comes time to write a verdict, 2 or more GMs sit down and look through it all and write a verdict. Once again, due to different people being in different timezones and having different view points, this can lead to inconsistencies in things that aren't so clear cut. 

Having a slightly subjective touch can be alright, but I do think a more objective touch would be good. Having an objective mindset would at the very least help get the facts straight, and then we can look at it with a slightly more subjective mindset on the things that aren't as black and white as fact and false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
5 minutes ago, Pado said:

Jesus .... I just play fucking video games

mhmm mhmm.

Everyone needs to just chill and stop wasting their time being worried about something so petty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sam Fields    153
55 minutes ago, Bruce said:

mhmm mhmm.

Everyone needs to just chill and stop wasting their time being worried about something so petty.

Well, my point is that everyone is so worried. Or maybe they're just kicking up a fuss about nothing as an excuse to target authority figures? 

1 hour ago, Pado said:

Jesus .... I just play fucking video games

Glad we're on the same page. I tend to avoid shit like this on the forums, but a recently locked thread spurred on this masked stab at people criticising staff subjection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caesar    438
Posted (edited)

I have always been a fan of following an actual legal like system. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand the basics.

Rule breaks have standard punishments (or punishment ranges).

You can have different degrees of infractions (aggravated and extenuating circumstances here).

Case law is developed and precedent is relied on heavily to maintain strong consistency.

The system while never perfect is good enough for most countries legal systems so why not here?

We use to have this system and from what I understand standard punishments have been removed which is a bad start IMO and apparently while situations are "case by case" very little deference is given to historical actions. "Case by case" or in a legal context to "distinguish" should not be the norm and should be the exception. It needs to exist as unique situation do arise.

Edited by Caesar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
1 hour ago, Pado said:

Jesus .... I just play fucking video games

This ^ 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
17 minutes ago, Caesar said:

I have always been a fan of following an actual legal like system. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand the basics.

Rule breaks have standard punishments (or punishment ranges).

You can have different degrees of infractions (aggravated and extenuating circumstances here).

Case law is developed and precedent is relied on heavily to maintain strong consistency.

The system while never perfect is good enough for most countries legal systems so why not here?

We use to have this system and from what I understand standard punishments have been removed which is a bad start IMO and apparently while situations are "case by case" very little deference is given to historical actions. "Case by case" or in a legal context to "distinguish" should not be the norm and should be the exception. It needs to exist as unique situation do arise.

Pretty much this. I got no BeanZ so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
2 hours ago, Dusty said:

I agree. If we wanted to go the cold, scientific approach, we'd only allow reports that have video evidence, which could be a good thing. However, it'd make the job even more difficult as it's difficult for a human - especially a volunteer - to be as cold and objective as possible. 

Some reports can be handled in a cold and scientific way, but the reports that involve potential bad RP are impossible to be completely objective with. Each situation is different, and needs to be treated differently. Lately there's been a lot of hate for the case by case system for some reason. If we didn't use the case by case system, then, for example, every post that was a little bit aggressive or used potentially insulting word choice would result in warning points, even if the post broke no forum rules. I'm sure everybody would absolutely hate that type of forum moderation. 

While case by case basis can leave room for inconsistency, it is the best way to go. Consistency can be especially difficult to reach when there are many different view points and opinions within the staff team. When a reported post comes up, around 3-10 max staff members discuss the post and whether or not it deserves points. Because of this, there can be a lot of inconsistency. This is how reports are handled as well. When it comes time to write a verdict, 2 or more GMs sit down and look through it all and write a verdict. Once again, due to different people being in different timezones and having different view points, this can lead to inconsistencies in things that aren't so clear cut. 

Having a slightly subjective touch can be alright, but I do think a more objective touch would be good. Having an objective mindset would at the very least help get the facts straight, and then we can look at it with a slightly more subjective mindset on the things that aren't as black and white as fact and false.

So many inconsistencies. I have to say that if there are this many inconsistencies, you all are doing something extremely wrong. When it comes to some rules, it either is, or is not a rule break. With othera like badrp, that should be where there COULD be come discrepancy. With points, it either breaks community rules, or it doesnt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusty    1052
20 minutes ago, Thumper said:

So many inconsistencies. I have to say that if there are this many inconsistencies, you all are doing something extremely wrong. When it comes to some rules, it either is, or is not a rule break. With othera like badrp, that should be where there COULD be come discrepancy. With points, it either breaks community rules, or it doesnt. 

As I said, with many different view points, and with the inability for every single staff member to be part of every single reported post discussion, inconsistencies might happen. You need to accept that. The entire community needs to accept that. We're working on remedying the issues, but we're all volunteers and we're all humans. Mistakes will be made. Former staff teams have made just as many mistakes, but it's only now that it's all getting called out as much as it is because that's the new craze in the community. 

I'm not saying the feedback is wrong, but cut us some slack please. Many people are blowing it all way out of proportion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Dusty said:

As I said, with many different view points, and with the inability for every single staff member to be part of every single reported post discussion, inconsistencies might happen. You need to accept that. The entire community needs to accept that. We're working on remedying the issues, but we're all volunteers and we're all humans. Mistakes will be made. Former staff teams have made just as many mistakes, but it's only now that it's all getting called out as much as it is because that's the new craze in the community. 

I'm not saying the feedback is wrong, but cut us some slack please. Many people are blowing it all way out of proportion.

No actually @Dusty we didnt make these types of mistakes. Its getting called out because it isnt supposed to happen.  Keep your opinions out of reports and focus on what actually happened. Former staff have given you all tons of advise on how to do this. There are guide after guide on staff related things telling you exactly how to handle everything from moderating posts to issuing verdicts. If people cant do it, they need to realize they are no longer helping the community but hindering its natural processes.

Edited by Thumper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Dusty said:

I agree. If we wanted to go the cold, scientific approach, we'd only allow reports that have video evidence, which could be a good thing. However, it'd make the job even more difficult as it's difficult for a human - especially a volunteer - to be as cold and objective as possible. 

Some reports can be handled in a cold and scientific way, but the reports that involve potential bad RP are impossible to be completely objective with. Each situation is different, and needs to be treated differently. Lately there's been a lot of hate for the case by case system for some reason. If we didn't use the case by case system, then, for example, every post that was a little bit aggressive or used potentially insulting word choice would result in warning points, even if the post broke no forum rules. I'm sure everybody would absolutely hate that type of forum moderation. 

While case by case basis can leave room for inconsistency, it is the best way to go. Consistency can be especially difficult to reach when there are many different view points and opinions within the staff team. When a reported post comes up, around 3-10 max staff members discuss the post and whether or not it deserves points. Because of this, there can be a lot of inconsistency. This is how reports are handled as well. When it comes time to write a verdict, 2 or more GMs sit down and look through it all and write a verdict. Once again, due to different people being in different timezones and having different view points, this can lead to inconsistencies in things that aren't so clear cut. 

Having a slightly subjective touch can be alright, but I do think a more objective touch would be good. Having an objective mindset would at the very least help get the facts straight, and then we can look at it with a slightly more subjective mindset on the things that aren't as black and white as fact and false.

Pretty much this. Well said bro. I like your idea man but for unpaid work why would anyone wanna do it like this? I think reports etc should take more of a legal approach then scientifically but that's just my thought. But also I agree with @caesar and with thumper as well. I don't remember it being like this when I first joined. You knew exactly what was getting banned and what wasn't. I used to sit and study reports to learn what was bad and what wasn't to make me better in game. Now I feel like you can't do that. Seems like staff has Gone soft. But like dusty saaid for unpaid volunteer work. 

Also feel like there shouldn't be opinions in reports. It never was like that before. You gave bad rp you got got banned. You NVFL you NVFL there was no oh he gave good rp in the past. Because it happened to me and I still got banned. It needs to be handled the Same for everyone. If you fuck up no mater who you are you get banned. Just like everyone else. When you bring in opinions we get too soft and liberal and everyone gets off with a handjob and a Lolly pop. 

Edited by Diamond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

I just want staff to look into why they believe this happens so frequently now. Up until the last six months or so, I hardly ever recall any verdicts having to be overturned by Rolle. There was maybe one in the year and a half I was here that I can remember. Now it seems, along with threads discussing and analyzing every verdict, that it's almost a weekly or sometimes daily thing.

There's something to be said when every decision you make is second guessed. Sorry to say, but the quality went downhill during the summer. With the massive influx of staff, I believe it went from around 30 staff members to 55-ish. There was an all time high of 18 GameMasters I believe. The mass recruitment of new blood into staff is partially what killed it, imo. People were thrown into positions they weren't ready for with little to no guidance from higher staff ranks, and it still shows now. There are times where it seems headless chickens handle reports, which leads to poor decisions from the start of the report until the verdict.

Whatever. Might not even be on topic, I'm just "salty ex-staff" as I've been called. It's just going to fall on deaf ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
7 minutes ago, Tosh said:

Whatever. Might not even be on topic, I'm just "salty ex-staff" as I've been called. It's just going to fall on deaf ears.

I agree, as ex-admin and scum community member you should know better, Tosh.

Back on topic:

From my time here since July 2013, up until late 2016 reports were handled quite clearly:

Was there a similar situation at hand? Yes. -> same terms can be applied and punishment will be similar. Minor adjustments might be made in case the intensity of the rule break had different motives (e.g. fire fight KoS, aggravated RP).

This system left users with a plethora of reports to look back at and actually learn to understand the rules better, because they were applied the same way to all situations. Report discussions would base themselves on previous reports with similar situations and it made arguments clear and bias could not be noticed, as everything was handled on the same basis. Right now, I think, the staff team lacks the experience that older staff members had gotten from the precursors. Where the transition of experience and wisdom to the new members stopped or started to go down, I don't know. But where the problem started is rather irrelevant, the solution is important. 

Looking back at the massive numbers of discussions that had popped up in response to questionable staff verdicts, I think there's enough of a knowledge basis to pick up on and better the situation. The current team should pick up the old system as described by @Caesar and @Thumper. It was a system that worked on a consistent basis, it was unbiased and nobody could even bring up staff bias as it was pretty much impossible with the legal system. Along with the re-implementation of the old system along with improvement in communication and work ethics, this should bring staff into a good light again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kat    101

I think @Tosh is right.  Staff didn't work their way up through the ranks and have time to learn the ropes.  This community continues to evolve, but it has the same basic principles.  I think that those got lost, not due to the staff member's themselves, but due to the way they were made staff.  It can't be easy to deal with a community this size, with so many personalities and opinions coming at you.  But, if you can take the comments for what they are, constructive criticism that comes from a good place, you will learn.

I know not everyone is a @Thumper fan or a @Rampage fan or a @Tosh fan, but these guys did a great job in staff.  From personal experience, I can tell you that Thumper can be the most opinionated, obstinate man, but when it came to a verdict, he knew the rules and went by them.  He might have bitched about it, but he went with what was right.  We have the Mentor program for new players, why can't there be a mentor program for staff?  These guys are here for the betterment of the community.  Why not use them?

To staff, hang in, learn and grow.  And stop being so defensive.  Like I said, I know it can be hard with the constant harping, but it's given to help you learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
1 hour ago, Dusty said:

As I said, with many different view points, and with the inability for every single staff member to be part of every single reported post discussion, inconsistencies might happen. You need to accept that. The entire community needs to accept that. We're working on remedying the issues, but we're all volunteers and we're all humans. Mistakes will be made. Former staff teams have made just as many mistakes, but it's only now that it's all getting called out as much as it is because that's the new craze in the community. 

I'm not saying the feedback is wrong, but cut us some slack please. Many people are blowing it all way out of proportion.

Not trying to be hard on yall for the shits and giggles although you may feel like that.  We or at least I am hard on yall because I care.   A community is only as strong as its leadership and whether you want to believe it or not, you all have a massive role to play that is beyond just doing a couple of verdicts or pulling some logs.  You all set the tone for how the community runs, how we interact with one another and how the role play goes.  

Now I am going to be very very honest and it will hurt some feelings.

The staff team as it is currently is not good at all.  Not saying everyone is bad, but overall, it's literally watching a chicken run around with their head cut off.  There is a lack of leadership, a lack of understand one's role, and a lack of actual passion for roleplay and DayZRP. 

Now before the "oh Rampage is just a bitter old ex staff member who is just mad."  Well yeah, I'm always an asshole, when has that ever changed.  But on the real, the shit I am saying now is the same shit, (which some of you even agreed with me) I said while I was back in staff.  I let it be known to everyone this recent go around my opinion.  It's the main part of why I left staff in the first place.  

While I was in staff there were people, GMs who had no clue on policy and procedures.  These were "seasoned" GMs as well.   I would get bitched at for doing "A", all while being told, we don't do "A" anymore, just to find out later that we still do "A".   On top of that there is a ton of inactivity which forces a select few of GMs to rush out reports because they sit their for weeks and feel that they need to do it.  Its fact @Dusty that GMs are not all pulling their weight.   This whole behind the scenes crap has always been an excuse.  Only Staff members who can get away with that are Mods and Admins.  GMs are kind of the at the frontlines or at least they should be.  

I can literally rant and call out all the reason why things are the way they are, but my intention is not to embarrass anyone.  

I understand staff is getting annoyed by all the complaints, but you all are doing it to yourselves.  Back when I was in staff, we were all very respected.  Sure from time to time we made mistakes and we had "staff sucks" drama, but that was far and few between.  This is becoming a weekly occurrence, even daily.   This doesnt bode well for the community.  

But then again, its really not all your fault it's the leadership.  You are all trained poorly and don't have anyone to really look up to.  I challenge you all to go read some old verdicts from people like @Caesar, @Sin, or any other old GMs/admins.  That was quality.  The problem I see is that there really isnt any more quality.  Staff used to get promoted based on the quality of their work. Now it just seems like who has been here longer and who has the most activity according to some spreadsheet.   Back in the day it we would challenge each other to write the best damn verdicts possible.  Arguing reports used to be such a wonderful experience.  Now you have too many "yes men" or "I sign" without anyone actually comprehending anything.  Nobody even plays devil's advocate anymore?  You argue any report and people get their feelings hurt.  Terra, Thumper, myself along with others would argue for hours and fight over verdicts, but at the end of it we never took it personal.

Here is the difference, and I will let this all marinate with you all.    

When I was in staff a long time ago as a GM/Admin you had to convince someone on your point of view and you would argue it.  When a GM/Admin would challenge your opinion you best be prepared to bring the facts and argue your case.  

This past go around when I recently came back as a GM, most of the time I would challenge GMs to go into detail on why they came to that conclusion for a verdict.  Most (not all) would be triggered, say it's the way they feel and that I shouldn't be an asshole for challenging their opinion because that is their opinion.  Very seldom could someone provide specific details on why a person came to that conclusion and be able to argue their points.  That was part of the feedback I provided when I left.  Just because you say "its your opinion" doesn't mean the argument should stop.   If you are going to state your "opinion" you best be prepared to throw down some facts on why you reached that conclusion.  This was one of the major factors on why verdicts were lacking in consistency and quality.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NishiUrban    79

 I believe there is a multitude of reasons for why things have changed into what they are currently, although I won't bore you all and go into hours of ranting and analysis I'll throw some things I believe should be thought provoking.

 

 Since I joined the community there has been the use of certain buzz-words that have only grown more vocal, and obviously the generation of members who 'grew up' around these buzz-words have adopted them to varying degrees, and it now effects their opinions once in Staff.

 

Prime example being case-by-case. When you hear that, what does it mean to you personally? Because it can mean something completely different to someone else. Does case-by-case mean I can do literally anything, even if it breaks the rules, and depending on 'how' I did it I could be totally fine? Or if I do something that doesn't break any rules, depending on 'how' it was done I could still get a ban? When the rules take a back seat to personal opinion of like, twenty or more different individuals, of course Staff is going to be accused of bias or arguments of overturning verdicts are going to be thrown out there. On that note, I have to wonder how many 'new' staff members have been involved in a verdict and felt like they had to agree with the other staff members involved in the decision of the report, when perhaps they didn't agree with the outcome and could have voiced that concern beforehand to prevent a verdict that later gets overturned for being viewed as wrong. Ever have that 'don't rock the boat' mentality in Staff? 

 

 What about role-play > rule-play? Rule-play is what exactly? Following the rules too closely? Abusing the rules? I get that people want others to propagate the mentality of putting role-play first, but it's gone well beyond that at this point. Which rules do I have to follow, and which can I just straight up disregard because I can justify it with role-play > rule-play? Which rights can I use, and which will I get banned for using despite me gaining them through the rules? Things like KoS rights and when it's apparently acceptable to use them is a prime example, used to be really simple to understand but now it feels like if you ever kill anyone at all despite the rules saying you have the right too you risk getting a ban time out in the corner if they feel salty about it and report you. Shit don't get me started on settlements, and the blatant rule-play involved in protecting them for the sake of role-play > rule-play, fucking irony.

 

 Not trying to throw shade at staff or anything, but as someone on the outside looking in. When I see senior Staff members who have been around the block, joining back in, and eventually leaving the first thing that comes to my mind is "wonder what Staff did this time". Sure, it could just be they have IRL or personal reasons for leaving, but I can't be the only one who thinks that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanye    14
Posted (edited)

#rampageforCEO2k17

 

But really, Mod staff was solid, since SA started I have not seen the same quality in report verdicts or in community relations. There were also staff from both sides, campfire and PvP, now, not so much. If PvP oriented players don't have a voice in staff, you get bullshit like Jimmy.

Edited by Kanye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
1 minute ago, Kanye said:

#rampageforCEO2k17

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
5 minutes ago, NishiUrban said:

 When I see senior Staff members who have been around the block, joining back in, and eventually leaving the first thing that comes to my mind is "wonder what Staff did this time". Sure, it could just be they have IRL or personal reasons for leaving, but I can't be the only one who thinks that way. 

I don't wanna speak for anyone else, but I know I didn't leave because of the work. I still enjoyed doing reports and ban appeals, i just really enjoyed doing admin or GM work. I don't think Rampage, Kattica, or Echo left because they didn't enjoy the work either but I'll let them confirm or deny that point. I left admin partly for personal reasons, but when I went back as a GM and left a month later, it was entirely due to people in staff who effectively forced me out because I got tired of how things were by that point. No room for some of us who actively voice our opinions anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Tosh said:

I don't wanna speak for anyone else, but I know I didn't leave because of the work. I still enjoyed doing reports and ban appeals, i just really enjoyed doing admin or GM work. I don't think Rampage, Kattica, or Echo left because they didn't enjoy the work either but I'll let them confirm or deny that point. I left admin partly for personal reasons, but when I went back as a GM and left a month later, it was entirely due to people in staff who effectively forced me out because I got tired of how things were by that point. No room for some of us who actively voice our opinions anymore.

Pretty much why I left in such short time.  I honestly like the work and like doing reports it's fun.  I enjoy interacting with the community.  To be honest, I didnt want to leave.  But when I'm criticized for challenging people's opinions, because they feel entitled to one without ever having to back it up then it gets frustrating.  It was made clear that old opinionated assholes like me were not really welcomed.   There were other factors as well.  But the old ways that staff did things are long gone.  I'm a relic of the past.  

Edited by Rampage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
12 minutes ago, Kanye said:

#rampageforCEO2k17

 

But really, Mod staff was solid, since SA started I have not seen the same quality in report verdicts or in community relations. There were also staff from both sides, campfire and PvP, now, not so much. If PvP oriented players don't have a voice in staff, you get bullshit like Jimmy.

Not for nothing, but there are six people in the staff team who were members of the little known bandit/pvp group known as teh horsemans. All styles of play are represented on the staff team. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanye    14
Just now, Plank said:

Not for nothing, but there are six people in the staff team who were members of the little known bandit/pvp group known as teh horsemans. All styles of play are represented on the staff team. :)

Yea, but horsemen? Do they count?;)

We used to have lawyers fighting on the PvP side in staff, as rampage said, the "devils advocate". 

IMO pvp players are more in tune with the rules as we are the ones pushing them and the ones actually in contact with them. It's hard to really get the nuance of combat rules poking wolves with a pitchfork.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
7 minutes ago, Rampage said:

Pretty much why I left in such short time.  I honestly like the work and like doing reports it's fun.  I enjoy interacting with the community.  To be honest, I didnt want to leave.  But when I'm criticized for challenging people's opinions, because they feel entitled to one without ever having to back it up then it gets frustrating.  It was made clear that old opinionated assholes like me were not really welcomed.   There were other factors as well.  But the old ways that staff did things are long gone.  I'm a relic of the past.  

I've said in the past staff now isn't the same staff team I joined in May 2015, or even the same team from May 2016. Something changed after Roman and I left, and it isn't for the better. Anything resembling the old staff team is dead at this point. You know, the same staff who was looked up to by the community rather than under constant scrutiny. Staggs is basically the last one left, but he's moved over to LM at this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×